I hate this project I’m working on so much that in my quest to procrastinate, I’ve returned to both Twitter AND Facebook. HELP.

#the sela petrae and drakestone of social media

FLUTIE. 

lbr twitter's recommended follows is the digital equivalent of anders asking you to see if you can find a few more deposits.

What pains me is that they give the important plot episodes to the amateur writers, and not to someone like Carver or Edlund  

It's not "they". It's Carver. Ultimately, this comes back to him, because he's the one who gave the say-so for that crapfest (and 8x09, and 8x07, and 8x03, and 8x02) to grace our airwaves.

This is terrible showrunning, plain and simple. I mean, you don't give out important episodes like your mid-season premiere -- or, for that matter, your mid-season finale -- to someone who's only ever written as part of a partnership. You give these episodes to your best writers, people who've proven time and again that they can write well when it counts. Or maybe you even do as Gamble did, and you step in and write them yourself.

For the Big Episodes, bring out the Big Guns. Isn't that just common sense?

(And I say that as someone who's liked Klein's writing in the past -- I thoroughly enjoyed "The Curious Case of Dean Winchester" and "Caged Heat", and hey, I even kinda liked "Out With The Old", despite my qualms about its characterizations. But this was just... not good.)

Jack Frost's Heroine's Journey

So I saw Rise of the Guardians on lookingatthepieces‘s recommendation, and on the whole, I liked it very, very much. And, wow, talk about a textbook case of Heroine’s Journey. Like Flutie catnip. :)

Let’s step through it stage by stage, shall we?

Needless to say, there are Super Duper Plot Spoilers behind the break:

Read More

Just saw this movie, and I loved it! And this certainly helps explain why I liked it so much, beyond my initial incoherent fangirling. I do find myself disagreeing on one point, though. I didn’t really see the Tooth Fairy as the love interest; in fact, I didn’t really think there was any love interest at all. 

I saw the Tooth Fairy more as a maternal or possibly big sister figure. She’s the Keeper of Memories, collecting children’s baby teeth which hold precious childhood memories. At one point, she’s seen Jack’s. She mentioned that to him while explaining why she collects teeth. And there was also the scene when she first met him. She fangirls over his teeth, which could mean she’d seen baby versions of them before. My mind automatically made the connection to older maternal figure. Because who else remembers your childhood and (probably) collected your baby teeth? Your mother. 

And then, there’s the age difference. My memory’s already a little fuzzy on this, so someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I think Jack has been around for 300 years, not counting the time when he was human. I’m fairly certain that, when asked, the Tooth Fairy said the last time she was ‘out in the field’ collecting teeth herself was something like 400 years ago. And if we assume that she was doing that for a while, then there’s quite a bit of difference in their ages. I’m not sure this is really relevant to the ‘not a romance’ argument, as they are immortal beings, but it definitely sways me more toward a mother-child relationship than a romantic one. 

I don’t think the lack of romance detracted from the overall movie. It would be, at best, a side plot and, at worst, something that they tried to shoehorn in just for the sake of having a romance. For a movie about finding one’s purpose in life and the journey to self discovery, I don’t think romance is a necessary component.  

Or, I could be completely delusional and they’ll be canon by the next movie (if there is a next movie).

Definitely a fair point. And I admit, I struggled with how to classify Tooth, because her and Jack's relationship does come off as fairly un-romantic in the movie. Yet, while she seems like a Mother figure to the tooth fairies, she doesn't strike me as particularly motherly to Jack in particular -- plus there was that awkward bit at the end, the "do we hug, or not?" moment you typically see given to love interests.

Also, I can't quote scenes because I've only seen the movie once, but in Tooth's introduction, I got the impression that, while she discourages her own fairies from fangirling about Jack in his presence, she crushes on him just as much as they do -- she's just trying to hide it from him.

Sometimes the SPN fandom as a whole just depresses me.

Look, I like Flutiebear’s meta. Really, I do.

I don’t agree with her interpretation of the source material a good fifty percent of the time, but that doesn’t mean it’s not fun to read and view SPN in a different light.

Flutie and I don’t...

This is one of the kindest things anyone has ever said about my writing, and it's honestly the kind of comment I live to hear. Not just, "you changed the way I think about things", but "you changed the way I think about things AND I think you're wrong". To a writer, it's a compliment of the highest caliber, that your prose has so affected someone that they can appreciate it even when they think you're full of shit. :)

Look, I know I joke a lot. I kid. I brush things off. But the truth is, as a writer, I know the power of language, and how deeply words can cut, both to harm and to heal. I put on a good front, but I stew over anon hate just as much as anybody else, and hell, even a less-than-complimentary reblog can put me in a funk for hours.

But that's the thing about publishing my thoughts for public consumption: It's me inherently commodifying myself, and turning myself into a set of ideas to be shared and examined and ripped apart. To most, I am not an individual, but the product I create, be it meta, fanfic, or whatever. And that's okay. Really, it is. I'm a big girl, and I accept that; it's just part and parcel of the gig.

But when I see things like this, and especially all the lovely replies and messages you all have been leaving me all weekend (well, actually, ALL the time, because you lovely readers inundate my inbox and really know how to make a girl feel loved) it really reminds me of why I write, and it makes weathering any momentary hiccups worthwhile. 

So thank you, cornnuts, and thank you everyone else, the dozens, even hundreds, of you who have written me over the past several months. Your kindness is not falling on deaf ears (blind eyes? whatever the online equivalent is), and I assure you, each and every one of you is very much appreciated :)

Just started Season 6 with the hubs, and holy shit “Exile On Main St” is so good. So much better than I remember. Not a wasted word, not a wasted shot, not a wasted second.

Let’s just take this one shot, shall we?

That’s Dean’s shadow on the wall there, with the sun coming through the…

Dean did walk out on Sam and Cas at the end of “99 problems” and had been, supposedly, daydreaming about Lisa and Ben for a while, to the point when he “pictured” himself happy was with them.

Sam might have done some projecting by making Dean promise to go to them but I think the bigger issue was Dean daydreaming about perfect strangers(as a coping mechanism probably for his sucky reality) and pulling away from his real family. So yeah, personally, I put Dean going to Lisa and Ben all on him.

He chose this. He chose to go knock on her door on the end of “99 problems”, he chose to honor Sam’s last request and he chose to remain on this relationship for as long as he did during S6. So while I agree with the “trapped” theme, I think the one responsible for Dean’s prison is Dean and no one else.

I also don’t blame Sam and Bobby for their insistence on what Dean should want. They’re basically the dellusional version of Dean from S5 for me, when it comes to a “normal life” and I like that they stand in contrast with this S6 Dean who is starting to learn you don’t get to hyjack someone’s elses life and forget everything that came before.

Well, of course, Dean thought he wanted the apple pie life in Season 5; I'm not saying he didn't. But by the end of "Swan Song", it's made abundantly clear that all Dean wanted was his brother back; and that he didn't go to the Braedens because he wanted that life, but because he promised Sam he'd do so. As Chuck narrates in "Swan Song":

But like you said, promise or no, Dean did choose to go to the Braedens; thus in "Exile on Main Street" he's languishing in a Cage of his own choosing. Yet while that is true, it's also an incomplete summary of the situation, because if Dean had known Sam was back as soon as he was pulled from the Pit, he likely would've made much different decisions regarding his life with the Braedens.

So while I don't think Bobby, Sam or Samuel are to blame, per se, for Dean going to Lisa in the first place, I do think that by not telling Dean that Sam had returned, they had, in effect, erased Dean's agency in the situation. They had chosen to continue his participation in the "apple-pie life" for him, and in doing so, they'd taken away his free will and given him peace, whether Dean wanted that kind of peace or not.

Then when confronted with it, rather than listen to Dean tell them what he actually wanted, they instead inform Dean of what they think Dean wanted and "deserved" -- they in effect become his new "guardian angels" of sorts, enforcing peace over freedom.

Soulless!Sam does it: 

Bobby does it too, out of love (thankfully he seems to recognize how much his actions hurt Dean, and seems genuinely remorseful for doing so):

Even Samuel chose not to contact Dean, in large part because he projected Mary onto Dean, and it's implied that by giving Dean peace he could in some way give it to Mary:

It's a complicated situation, and it sucks all around, but I understand why everyone did what they did. And while I'm not denying that Dean ends up at Lisa's in "Exile on Main St" because of the choices he made in "Swan Song", I still think it's really, really shitty of everyone, especially Bobby and Sam, to not tell Dean Sam had returned.

But here's the best part, the brilliant part: It's not about the blame, not really. What I love about Season 6 is that who's to blame for what happens doesn't actually matter, because everyone is to blame. That's the difference between childhood and adulthood -- children are taught that in every conflict there's right and wrong; good and bad; winners and losers. But adults know that it doesn't matter so much who broke the glass of milk or how, only that we all get on our knees and clean up the mess.

XD

Read More

Okay, I'm in. You got me.

Am I crazy...

…or is everybody acting like either DESTIEL IS NOT CANON IT WILL NEVER BE CANON WHAT THEY’RE DOING ON THE SHOW IS QUEER BAITING GAAAAAH or IT IS TOTALLY CANON THEY ARE SO IN LOVE AND HAVING HOT ANGEL-ON-HUMAN SEXY-TIME WHENEVER THE CAMERAS LEAVE THEM, and nobody is considering the possibility that they have feelings for one another that may turn into a relationship but they haven’t talked about it because they’re both scared and it is a super-complicated situation? Does it really have to be either queer-baiting or an “implicit and/or non-sexual relationship?” Can’t they just not have gotten there yet? That’s what I assumed the situation was before I started reading tons of people’s opinions, and I just wonder if I’m losing it for thinking that there’s another side to the argument.

Fine, I lied. One last comment, because:

Okay, NOW it's work time. :)

I mean, I don’t know what to tell you. I think it’s pretty obvious they’ve made it an explicit romantic relationship in-show, but if you read it as queer-baiting, I’m not sure anything i can say will convince you otherwise.

I guess the only thing I can do is I’d turn the question back on you…

See, I just… don’t know. Personally, I’m still not convinced. From the perspective of a Destiel shipper, I could probably bring myself to agree, although I’d still have reservations. As a member of the LGBT community? Not so much.

For one thing, I would absolutely query the premise that people are more likely to default towards assuming a platonic relationship between any given two characters. Just because they might be inclined to do this in real life does not mean they are inclined to do this in fiction. There are still certain antediluvian narrative expectations at play in the overwhelming majority of fiction: the main girl falls for the main guy – or, alternatively, the secondary girl falls for the main guy, or vice versa. Basically, it’s difficult to find media – particularly a longstanding TV show – without an ounce of romance. Or, alternatively, without the expectation of romance. And, outside of fandom, you just don’t get that kind of expectation for same-sex pairs. Not even close. Practically everything is laced with the assumption of heteronormativity: every character is straight until proven otherwise. If I am watching any given TV show, there is, if nothing else, a much higher probability that the male/female pair I am watching interact will, at some point, either get together, or have acknowledged romantic chemistry. If the pair is male/male? Very, very rarely will there be the same assurance. If the pair is female/female? Hah! I wish.

So actually, yes. I would like to see an onscreen kiss. I really, really would. Mostly because I’m sick of being told that subtext – however blatant; however much it overlaps with text - is enough for me. I’m sick of this glorification of unspoken queer romance that is, in some respects, merely another extension of ‘the love that dare not speak its name’ trope: I want Destiel to be spoken, and acknowledged, not just implied. Not necessarily right now. Not even this season; in fact, that would probably be too soon. But definitely sometime during the series. As a shipper, I’d probably be satisfied with what we’ve had so far. As a queer girl who’d like to subsist on something other than subtext? Quite honestly, I’m still frustrated. Actually, scratch that first part: as a shipper, ideally, I would still like some form of resolution. Ideally, I want it all: I want my tired, hackneyed big romantic finale, in which there are mutual declarations of love and some pretty unambiguous smooching – because this is something that queer characters so very rarely get to have.

Obviously, there is no objective interpretation of a work of fiction. But this doesn’t mean that there aren’t layers of intent for the audience to parse. Friends can kiss, sure. Platonic kissing is certainly a thing. But in terms of Supernatural as fiction – in terms of narrative tropes -a kiss would be a signifier, a moment of comparative certainty: a moment of ‘it would be pretty difficult to argue that this is platonic’.  

Furthermore, whilst I agree that having an unspoken-but-obvious romance occur between a man and a woman is innovative and refreshing – as in the case of Nine and Rose - I couldn’t say the same for queer romance. Because in terms of most manifestations of queer romance in fiction that is not specifically catered to an LGBT audience, this is the norm, not the exception. Where has it been done before? Try the entirety of literature prior to the early twentieth century. The few queer characters and fewer queer relationships that occurred were left unspoken – yet, like Destiel, difficult to plausibly argue against; coded, as it were, but often coded quite blatantly – by dint of necessity. Outright expression would have been unthinkable. Thus, writers maintained plausible deniability: if, for instance, they compromised by making reference to, say, David and Jonathon in relation to two male characters, those in the know would realise immediately that homosexuality was being discussed; whereas, those who didn’t recognise the reference would most likely ignore it – or, as was probably more often the case, they could actively choose not to see it. And I think this is exactly the kind of tactics the writers are – whether intentionally or not – using in relation to Destiel. Those in the know – those who want it to be canon – are presented with nigh-indisputable evidence. Those who don’t look for the evidence don’t see the proof; or, indeed, they can choose to ignore it.

That’s all very well, I suppose. But it’s done to death.

Lastly – and here we are veering into very subjective analysis, and hell, I might be a minority in this respect, although I doubt I am – but lastly, although it is perfectly possible for a relationship to be romantic without being remotely physical, I don’t think that this is necessarily the case for Dean and Castiel. I personally have always read their relationship as being highly sexually charged in addition to being highly romantic; every inch of their body language, to me, seems to suggest that they find each other sexually attractive in addition to attractive. And I’d like to see some sort of conclusion to that tension. Whilst sexual expression is by no means compulsory, I still see it as the logical progression of this specific relationship.

I hope this didn’t come across as aggressive, or adversarial, or rant-y. If it does, I apologise. I really love your meta; it’s made me totally re-evaluate my opinions of season 7. But on this particular issue, I’m going to have to disagree.  

Reblogging for the bits about Jonathan/David and subtext as the norm, and basically everything, because this is a really good post.

Also, maybe I should clear up something, because I think maybe I've been unclear? I'm not saying that Dean and Cas will never become physically intimate, or that they'll never say "I love you", only that they don't need to in order for their relationship to be canon. In fact, I agree with you, lifeinabox, that Dean and Cas's relationship is in fact highly sexually charged (just as Nine/Rose was, imo) and that some conclusion to that sexual tension would be very, very welcome. (Very.) And I'm with you in that I'd love to see the "tired, hackneyed big romantic finale, in which there are mutual declarations of love and some pretty unambiguous smooching" -- I want that very, very much, not just for reasons of catharsis and narrative pay-off, but also because it would be pretty fucking revolutionary to see two male protagonists kissing in an American genre fiction television show.

All I'm saying is that if any of that occurs, I wouldn't see that as the starting point of Dean and Cas's relationship. None of that would make the relationship canon, because to me, it already is. Nine kissing Rose didn't make their relationship canon, and Dean kissing Cas wouldn't make their relationship canon either. It's like, I didn't need a marriage certificate to know I was in love with Mr. Flutie, you know?

Finally, and this is more of an aside than anything else, but I'd argue that there's actually much more of a tradition of lesbian relationships depicted in American genre TV (i.e., scifi/fantasy) -- Willow/Tara, Talia/Ivanova, Xena/Gabrielle, Cain/Gina, etc. -- than male/male relationships, probably for the sole reason that straight male viewers, who traditionally have been the only acknowledged target audience for these shows, are stereotypically more accepting of F/F relationships than M/M ones. (The why, of course, is it's own can of worms, but still, the precedent is there, and I'd argue that they're not just relationships designed to titillate, either; these are meaty, flawed, complex relationships.)

Hello, comrades!

There’s been a lot of back and forth about AVSXMAS- excitement and disappointment and very extreme reactions abound. Some showed disappointment about the event (which is fine!) and some of which were outright wankers about the event and the man himself…

i prayed for you, cas, every night!: CWNBTS: Do you all REALLY mean it?

While this is a great idea, I’d feel really weird broadcasting to everyone the Random Acts of Kindness I’d perform, as I’ve always felt charity should be a privately conducted affair (even the photos of charitable acts we did for GISHWHES made me uncomfortable). So would it be okay if we just mentioned doing an RAoK, rather than specifying exactly what we did?

Absolutely, if you don’t feel comfortable sharing the details, nobody wants you to make you feel like you have to do so. It’s enough to know that you’re participating— though of course if you’d like to share we’d love to hear about it, as often someone’s act of kindness can spark the imagination and inspire another person to see an act they might have otherwise overlooked.  But either way, the most important thing is that you are participating and putting that kindness out into the world, even if you just feel like saying that you did one without giving specifics! 

Awesome. Then count me in! :)

impressioniste:

Exactly.

Which is why the final scene in the Gallows matters so much.

Because for once -- for what I think is the first time in the entire game -- it's just Anders asking Hawke. Not Justice pretending to be Anders, not Anders fighting away Justice. The voices in his head are finally in agreement.

And they agree that they want to be with Hawke.

/*sniff*

Reblog this with the weirdest fandom ship you have.

impressioniste:

Last night, I dared myjusticecake to write a Corff/Danarius slashfic.

She wisely declined.

hamburgerjack:

Maybe I should just let this go? I don't want to, because, I mean, I'd really like to talk with you more about our experiences, to learn more about your perspective, especially since it's so different from mine. Racism doesn't get better unless we talk about it, and if I'm wrong, if I'm being a privileged dipshit, I want to know about how and why, so I can adjust my opinion and actions accordingly.

But can we really have a thoughtful, meaningful discussion when you're handing out gold stars all over the place? I mean, I love gold stars. I fucking love gold stars. When the gold stars come out, I go nuts. I get Gold Star Fever.

MY GOD ITS FULL OF STARS

hamburgerjack:

I stand by what I wrote.

I grew up in the South. I am a Southerner at heart, no matter where I live. And I will always be proud to be a Southerner.

Southerners are racist, yadda yadda. Yes. We can be. Just like the rest of the United States. We just happen to have our sins dragged out for the rest of the country to see. Because we have a long history of oppression and racism, we make a good scapegoat for the rest of the country to purse their lips at and make clucking noises, and think to themselves, "Boy am I glad I'm not from there."

But the truth is, everyone's from the South. This entire country shares our sins. No one is clean. We just talk about it more.

After I moved to New York I started to see way, way more institutionalized, long-standing racism up here than I ever did back home. And really baldfaced person-to-person stuff, too. For example, the first week after my husband and I moved into our new home, one of my new neighbors actually said to me, "This neighborhood was great until all the n---s moved in."

I couldn't believe my ears. You'd never hear something like that in DC, or New Orleans, or even Houston. You can think it all you want; because people can think whatever dipshitty things they want to. And it sucks that people still do, and there's room to improve in that department. But you don't say something like that, and you certainly don't act on it, and you definitely don't pretend like it's a perfectly normal thing to believe, unless you want to get called on it.

So I called him on it. He didn't speak to me for a month, and still avoids me a little.

The U.S. still has racial problems, and the only difference I see is that up here, people up here like to pretend this tension doesn't exist. So it just festers, unacknowledged in the media, unaddressed in the community, and unabated from generation to generation.

In the South, we drag that shit out into the open. It gets talked about. Pored over. Prodded. Discussed. Take the Troy Davis issue: His case is a big deal because he died in Georgia; that, I think, made it more likely to be talked about, to get the attention it deserved. Honestly, if he'd died in New York, I doubt anyone would have even heard about it, because black men are executed all the time in New York and nobody ever talks about it.

Visibility doesn't make the South perfect --hell, not by a long shot. We've still got racism galore, and we've still got a long way to go toward healing the rift. But at least our problems are acknowledged. We get ugly about them in public, instead of pretending they don't exist. We're conscious of them in a way that people in other regions of the country aren't, I think, and that's what I was trying to get at.

I'm proud of that. I'm proud that for every racist dipshit there is in the South, there's someone willing to stand up for what's right and call people on their shit. We're a region of profoundly stupid people, but also profoundly brave and heroic people too. And maybe the forward-thinking people don't always succeed but then again, neither do the dipshits, and it's the struggle that matters, the fight that endures.

Bob Ewell was from the South, but so was Atticus Finch, you know?

I see a lot of parallels between Kirkwall and the South, a lot of the same ugliness and tension and potential and hope, and if you don't agree, fine, that's your opinion. But please don't tell me I don't have the background or experience to have a rational discussion about something just because you disagree with my opinion. If you think I'm full of shit, explain why; only then will I be able to understand.

pudgerigars:

Elthina was a lot more than in cahoots with Meredith. She is the sole reason why Meredith is where she is.

After the Threnhold uprising, Elthina hand-picked Meredith to succeed the previous Knight-Commander, Guylian. Meredith, as far as I can tell, had no rank to speak of; although she had enough authority to lead a group of Templars into the keep to capture Threnhold, the History of Kirkwall (IIRC) refers to her as just another Templar, not a "Knight-Lieutenant" or "Knight-Captain".

So why Meredith and not somebody higher up in rank? Well, ostensibly because she was the one who captured Threnhold.

But personally, I think it has way more to do with who Meredith is. Meredith was orphaned by her sister at a very early age -- so you better believe she's had these anti-mage tendencies for a long, long time.

Especially when you consider that most of the other old-guard Templars we've seen around the keep (Thrask, Emeric, and even Samson) are much gentler in their sympathies toward mages, Meredith's appointment seems like a slap in the face to any mage who supported Threnhold's uprising, a stern reminder that any further insolence will not be tolerated.

IMO, Elthina couldn't have not known what she was doing. She's got everyone fooled as this slightly dotty, grandmotherly figure, but the truth is she's terrifyingly manipulative and a brilliant political strategist. And after 30 years in this city, the old gal knows how to play the political game -- and she knows that sometimes, like with Petrice, her interests are best served by pretending to stay out of things.

When you think of her that way, recognizing the political genius that hides behind that grandmotherly face, I think it puts a lot of her actions in the game in perspective -- her refusal to get involved with the Qunari, her blase attitude toward Petrice's death. Even her actions toward Sebastian appear in an entirely different light. After all, Kirkwall -- and its Chantry -- is best served by a weak Starkhaven, no?

Oh Kirkwall. Let me love you forever and ever.

impressioniste:

I really do think Elthina thought what she was doing was in the best interest of Kirkwall and her flock.

But then again, most awful people never imagine they could be the villain of someone else's story.

pudgerigars:

To the OP: I think we can infer several things about the people of Kirkwall, given the city's recent history. But the biggest thing is this: Kirkwallians have seen a lot of bloodshed, and as of DA2, they want nothing more than peace. And by the time they realize what's going on, it's too late.

Recall that in 9:21, there was an city-wide uprising between Templar and City Guard/mercenaries/mages(?), when Viscount Perrin Threnhold tried to kick the Templars out of Kirkwall. (And that's not including their already long history of outside oppression, from the Qunari to Orlesians to the Tevinter slavers.)

I've written before about the environment surrounding that uprising, but the big takeaway is that pre-Uprising, Kirkwall may have been far more sympathetic to its mages -- especially given that Perrin Threnhold tried to free them.

Before this uprising, mages were, if not a constant presence in the city, at least visible -- we know from "Legacy" that 25 years ago, the Enchanters used to regularly perform for noble parties and were allowed to socialize with the regular citizens (indeed, that's how Malcolm and Leandra met). I think from this, we can infer that the noblility, at least, may have actually been somewhat fond of their mages, just as people think rock stars are pretty cool because they can play a guitar.

(Besides, I wouldn't be surprised if 9:20's Kirkwall had been more mage-sympathetic, given its history as a slaving town; from what I've seen from my childhood in the South, people who grow up with the heritage of slavery tend to be more conscious of its negative consequences, and more willing to spot in other forms. [Not always. But often.] They are taught, and they remember what other people forget.)

The previous two Viscounts, Perrin Threnold, and his father, Chastity, are remembered now as tyrants who took advantage of the end of Orlesian occupation to seize power. But remembered by who?

Marlowe Dumar's codex is written by a servant who was clearly sympathetic to the Threnhold reign; the servant writes,

And yet in the History of Kirkwall, Chastity is remembered as a "viscious thug who took power through a campaign of intimidation," and his son Perrin "was even worse".

Oh, wait. Who wrote THoK? Brother Genitivi. A Chantry scholar.

You know, if you had any doubt that history is indeed written by the victors.

We don't know for sure that Threnhold was a tyrant, or that he wasn't; but I suspect, given the freedom he allowed mages, the (clever) economic tarriffs he placed on Orlesian sea traffic, and the fact Kirkwall, as of Act 1, is still economically thriving despite just recently emerging from occupation, Perrin probably wasn't all that bad.

But we do know that Kirkwall, just ten years ago, saw a viscous, bloody battle erupt between its government and its church. Mommy and Daddy fighting, tearing the city apart. Lots of Templars died in that raid, including the Knight-Commander. And if lots of trained warriors in full plate fell, then you can only imagine what the casualties were on the other side.

Mommy won. And she did her damndest to make sure such an uprising would never happen again.

Elthina appointed a no-rank Templar to Knight-Commander  because she'd a) demonstrated the ruthlessness to get things done and b) she'd keep mages weak.

Meredith appointed a weak Viscount that would've been equally at home in the Weimar Republic, so that the Chantry wouldn't fear the State rising up against it.

It even goes deeper than that. 

Why are mage-sympathizers like Templars like Samson kicked out of the Order? So they can't rally anti-Meredith forces.

Why won't Dumar's puppetmasters (namely, Elthina & Meredith) allow him to deal with the Qunari problem? Because the Qunari keep people afraid.

Why do you think the City Guard was so corrupt before Aveline showed up? I suspect Jeven's appointment was intentional, to keep the guard weak and unorganized, and the populace afraid to go out at night.

Everything that happens in that city, everything, is about keeping the Chantry in control. And it's the common citizenry that suffer.

The Gallows is separate from the rest of the city, which means that the Templars and the mages alike are kept behind the curtain, to some extent. Like it was with Jews and other "unsavory elements" in the 1930's German ghettoes, I imagine that it's hard to feel like the problems of the unseen really affect regular citizens.

But Kirkwallers live in a city where gangs roam the streets nightly, even in Hightown. The Qunari -- foreigners that just 200 years ago had marched on Kirkwall for four years of horrifically bloody occupation -- are back, and the government can't keep them out. There are so many Ferelden refugees crowding the streets, taking up resources -- nobody will hire them, so they can't find work, so the problem isn't getting any better, and more and more of them are turning to lives of crime.

Kirkwall sucks, and, IMO, it's the Chantry's fault. Elthina's fault.

And it just gets worse as DA2 progresses. Midnight raids on mage families. Curfews for all citizens. Mage sympathizers dragged into the streets and executed (Ser Mettin, Act 3, I believe) -- if they don't just disappear. It's awful, and it should sound very familiar to any student of German or Russian history.

The more I learn about Kirkwall, the more I realize Anders was right -- not in murdering innocent Chantry members, but that change was never going to come, compromise never could have happened, because the time for compromise had ended the moment Elthina installed Meredith as Knight-Commander.

I think it's really interesting that the writers of DA2 created all this vibrant, complex backstory for Kirkwall, only to make it available mostly through codexes. It's an interesting narrative choice. Few people will take the time to pore over thisas they're playing the game, which means that, like Hawke, they're necessarily going through the events from a limited perspective, and it's unclear whether Anders' is right or the Templars, and you're not sure who you should trust, and everything's all a little murky.

And while it could be frustrating, I think it works. Very rarely in life do we have all the information we need to make important decisions. We just have to trust what we know, and act accordingly. Even if it means we trust people we shouldn't trust (Elthina) and condemn people who might be right (Anders, IMO). We go with the information we have, and we do the best we can.

Besides, if you pore over the stuff, like I'm doing, if you really sit and think about it, I think a clearer picture emerges. And it makes me kinda satisfied that Elthina gets her just rewards in the end.